Full text of "The Wenzelbibel, Cod. Pal. Vindob. 2759-2764"

See other formats

STOP

Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.

Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-
journal-content .

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.

IV.— THE WENZELBIBEL, Cod. Pal. Vindob. 2759-2764.

This, the most famous MS of the group called by Walther '
" 2. Zweig," comprises only the Old Testament, and that not
quite complete. The MS is of parchment, and consists at present
of six large folio volumes. A somewhat reduced facsimile of a
page of the first volume is given by Walther opposite col. 296.
The first volume contains the five books of Moses, and Joshua ;
the second, Judges, Ruth, and the four books of Kings ; the
third, Chronicles, Manasseh's Prayer, first to third Ezra, Tobias,
and the first seven verses of Judith ; the fourth, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Judith, Esther, Job, and the Latin introduction to the Psalms;
the fifth, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Solomon's Song, Wis-
dom of S., Ecclesiasticus and Prayer of S.; the sixth, Isaiah,
Jeremiah (without Lamentations), Baruch, Ezekiel. The MS is
written in large Gothic letters. The literature is given by Walther,
col. 291.

The material for the present paper was obtained in Vienna in
the summer of 1898. Having occasion to examine the MS for
the purposes of another investigation, I noticed that the MS had
not as yet been accurately described as regards scribes and
dialects, and therefore made notes and extracts which form the
basis of this article. Recently, a book by F. Jelinek 2 has
appeared, in which a considerable portion of my work has been
anticipated. Jelinek first describes the MS and the scribes, points
out certain errors of translation, and prints the prologue. He
then discusses in order the various vowels and consonants,
declension, conjugation, and certain syntactical phenomena. At

1 Die deutsche Bibelttbersetzung des Mittelalters, dargestellt von Wilh.
Walther. Braunschweig, 1889-92.

2 Die Sprache der Wenzelsbibel in ihrem Verhaltnis zu der Sprache der
wichtigsten deutschen Literatur- und Rechtsdenkmaler aus BShmen und
Mahren im XIV. Jahrhundert und der kaiserlichen Kanzlei der Luxemburger.
Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der neuhochdeutschen Schriftsprache von Dr.
Franz Jelinek. Gorz, 1899. Selbstverlag des Verfassers. Pp. no. Dr.
Goldlin von Tiefenau, Kustos of the Imperial library, who has most kindly
given me additional information on doubtful points, also first informed me of
the appearance of the above article.

THE WENZELBIBEL. 63

the same time comparisons are made with various Bohemian
texts of the fourteenth century. Finally, the various dialectic
phenomena are summed up, and the author concludes that the
translation originated at the end of the fourteenth century, in the
region to the north or northwest of Prague.

In so far as the above paper has anticipated the present one,
the treatment will be very brief; other questions will be treated
more in detail.

Four scribes contributed to the work, who change about fifteen
times. The first scribe wrote the first two volumes, and 6 ff. of
the third (Gen. to Paral. 4. 38). The text is decidedly Middle
German, though the long vowels are generally diphthongized.
The pronoun er often appears as her, the earliest place noted
being Gen. 18. 19, in the first volume. This writing becomes
more and more frequent in the course of the first and second
vols., extending into the third. Jelinek, p. 72, cites instances only
from the third volume. M.H.G. ■& generally appears as ou, most
frequently in the words ous, ouf. This scribe never writes aus,
auf, in this early portion at least. Sometimes even the undiph-
thongized vowel appears, as in cziten,fruntschaft, and still oftener
in us, uf, though in the beginning this is rare. The old diph-
thong ou generally appears as ou, though later au appears.
Flexional i is frequent; ver- uniformly appears as vor-; "ruck-
umlaut" preterites are very frequent; ie often appears as i; the
suffix -lich appears as such ; the diphthong of i, as also the old
diphthong ei, are written ei.

This scribe continues to vol. 3, f. 6 verso . Fol. j" ct ° begins
(I Paral. 4. 38) : | -ret grossleick ufi sie ingiengen in gadar uncz
zu dem awfgangk des tals. 1 This is by a Bavarian scribe (2),
forms such as tail, waid, aus, hawser, tragund, pergk, schoffen
{ovibus) gewant (= 0), occurring on this page. The writing is
larger, the ink blacker, illustrations and superscriptions are lack-
ing, while they do occur on the pages immediately preceding and
following. Fol. yverso i s blank, with the exception of one line.
F. 7 recto ends (I Paral. 5. 18) : pogen zu dem streitt | and the
verso contains : [ vier und vierczigk tawsendt. On f. 8 rect0 the
first scribe sets in again, the line on f. 7 V - being repeated thus :
vier und vierczik t0z«entt und siben hundert und vierczik czihende

X I quote the text and places according to the Vulgate, where the various
changes occur, as these are not given by Jelinek. Indeed the whole matter
of the scribes is disposed of by him in less than a page.

64 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

zu streite. This repetition, which occurs at almost every change
of scribes, generally gives an indication of the change of dialect,
cf. tawsendt : towsentt. Sometimes only one word is repeated ;
at others, nearly a whole sentence. The reason for this "varying
repetition is not yet entirely clear to me : Jelinek does not note
these repetitions at all.

It is evident that fol. 7 was inserted later by the Bavarian
scribe (2), who supplied a gap left by scribe 1. The omission
by scribe 1 probably came about as follows : — Up to 4. 38, where
the break occurs, the text consists entirely of an enumeration of
the various families. With the next verse the narrative sets in,
continuing to the end of the chapter. In the following chapter
the enumeration of the families begins again, and continues to
verse 18, where the narrative begins again. The scribe probably
made a pause, and on commencing again found the place where
the enumeration of the families ends, but in the fifth chapter,
instead of the fourth. Jelinek assumes, p. 4, bot., that, along with
others, this leaf had been lost and then replaced by the Bavarian
scribe. If this were the case, we should expect both sides of the
new leaf to be filled, and more than filled, for the writing on the
new leaf is larger than that of scribe 1.

The first scribe, who sets in again f. 8 r -, continues to the end of
f. I28 v -: Und hast uns gegeben ein solich wurtzen || (III Esdras
8. 88). On f. I29 r - the Bavarian scribe (2) sets in again : | soWche
wurczii und haben wider umbgekert . . . Characteristic forms such
as vermischt, unraynigkait, aus, auf, junkchfrawn, waynund,
weliben (= S) (col. 1, 1. 14), nymbar (= w) (1. 16), occur on this
page; on f. 130: pischolf, puech, grosleich. (For pischolf cf.
Weinhold, Bair. Gram., §159.) This Bavarian scribe (2) continues
to the end of f. I36 v - : chert auch gesunnter herwider zw uns und
deine augenn | (= Tobias 5. 26). On f. i37 r - the Middle German
scribe (1) sets in again : | ougen werden yn sehen wene ich
geloube . . .

This change of scribes helps to solve a question concerning the
translation itself. Jelinek, it may be noted, does not mention the
existence of any related MSS, whereas at least eleven exist ; cf.
Walther, col. 291. One of these, cgm. 341, may possibly be
older than the Wenzelbibel. At all events, the other MSS do not
descend from the Wb., but from some other MS now lost. This
will be shown conclusively later on. In spite of these MSS
Jelinek treats the Wb. as if it were a unique, original translation,

THE WENZELBIBEL. 65

and merely refers to a " Concept," which in all the wanderings and
vicissitudes of the MS remained with it, so that later, lost portions
could be replaced by the Bavarian scribes ! On p. 12 he asserts
rather naively that a comparison with the second pre-Lutheran
printed Bible proves this to be a different translation. It is thus
evident that he is entirely ignorant of the work of Walther, who
proved this fact nearly ten years ago.

In the matter of the text and scribes of the Wb., Walther, to be
sure, is not very successful. In the first place, he fails to note the
presence of the third book of Esdras, which in the MS continues
the second book (Nehemiah) without a break or change in the
superscriptions; at the end, f. i3i T -, the scribe wrote: "alhie
endt sich das ander puech Esdras," which, no doubt, also misled
Walther. This confusion probably existed very early in the
translation, and was not brought about by the scribe of the
Wb., for the Maihingen MS to be quoted later also shares this
confusion. Walther therefore states, col. 306 : " Wunderbarer-
weise bietet die Wenzelbibel im Buche Tobias eine durchaus
andere Uebersetzung als die ubrigen Handschriften. Wir haben
diese Partie von dem 2. Uebersetzungskreise auszuschliessen, und
werden sie spater als den fiinften Zweig behandeln." Later,
cols. 348-350, he treats the book of Tobias under the heading
"5- Zweig."

Walther is unable to determine where this new translation has
its beginning and end. During my stay in Vienna I was also
unable to determine this, not being able to compare with the texts
of the other MSS. Later, on comparing extracts from the Mai-
hingen MS, from Tobias 8. 3-10, and 11. 3, which I had made for
other purposes, I found that in these passages the Wb. agreed
with the text of Maihingen and the rest, so that the return to the
old translation in the Wb. must have taken place before this.
The Bavarian scribe, as before noted, had stopped at f. 136'- =
Tobias 5. 26, and I therefore suspected that the " 5. Zweig " of
Walther ended with this scribe, and probably also began with the
same, III Esdras 8. 88. Dr. Goldlin v. Tiefenau kindly sent me
a copy of the last lines off. i28 v> , and Dr. G. Grupp at Maihingen
copied the corresponding portions of the Maihingen MS III D.
1, fol. 1, which belongs to the same group, but contains the uni-
form translation of Walther's "2. Zweig." A comparison of the
two texts proved my conjecture to be correct. To the bottom of

f. I28 v - of the Wb. the two MSS agree almost letter for letter,
5

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

whereas from f. i2o r - they are entirely different, as a glance at the
annexed texts will show. This difference continues to f. 136*-
inch of the Wb., = Tobias 5. 26, and on the following page they
again agree exactly. The new translation was therefore inserted
by the Bavarian scribe (2), and extends from III Esdras 8. 88 to
Tobias 5. 26, exactly 8 pp., a signature.

Cod. Pal. Vind. 2761, f°- I28 T ',

col. 2, 11. 23-36.

(Ill Esdras 8. 85 seqq.)

Und nu ewer tSch

ter nicht fuget zti iren Sune
Und ire tochter nemet nicht
ewern sunen. Und siichet
nicht vride zu haben mit
yn alle czeit. so das oberwi-
dende esset die guten der
erden. Und teilet das erbe
ewern sunen untz bis ewi
clich. Und was euch wider
vert I das geschicht alles
durch ewer posen werk un
durch ewer grosen sunde.
Und hast uns gegeben ein
apponatur: solich wurtzen
(End off - 128 s -.)

Maihingen MS III D. i,fol. 1.

Und nu ewer toch-
ter nit fuget zu iren sunen
und ir tochter nemet nicht
ewern sunen und suchet
nit fryde zu haben mit
yn alezit so das uberwin-
dende esset dy guten der
erden und teylet das erbe
ewern sunen uncz bis ewi-
glichen und was euch wider-
veret das geschicht alles
durch ewer pose wergk und
dorch ewer gross sunde
und hast uns geben ein
semlich wurtzeln

fo. I29 >'Mto ) c0 ] It J j

soleiche wurczn und ha
ben wider umbgekert ze
ubertreten dein saczung
das wir uns vermtischt
wiirden der unraynnig
kait des auserlendischen
volkchs des daygen Ian
dts wirst du dann herr ich-
czurnen uns. und uns ze
uerderben. Als langk daz
nicht beleib unser wurczn
und nam. Herr got israhl'
der du warhaftig pist. wen
weliben ist dy warhaft
wurczn unczt auf den hew
ttigen tag. Ny'mbar yeczflt
sey wir in unsern poszhait
ten vor deinem angesicht.
etc.

und aber
wider sein wir wider gekart zu
ubertreten dein elichen werk
so das wir uns vormischten
der unreynigkeit fremder
heyden diser
erden.

nicht zurne uns
vorliesend uns uncz bis
nicht gelassen werd
unser czweigk und
unser nam. Herre got
warhafft bistu : wen
verlassen ist der
czweig bis in desen
heutigen tagk. Sich nu
seyn wir in unsern sunden
in diner angesicht.
etc.

THE WENZELBIBEL.

6 7

Cod. Pal. Vind. 2761, f°- 136™™,

col. 2, 1. 3 to end of page.

(Tobias 5. 23 seqq.)

. . Und do sy nw fertig warn
do hueb an sein muter ze way
nen und sprechen zum vater
Nw hast du genomen dein
aufhaltung den stab unsers
alters und hast yn gesantt
von uns. Nymmer mer solt
sein das selbig gelt. Darumb
du yn gesantt hast. Genuegt
hyet vns vnser armut das wirs
geschaczt hiette fur reichtumb
So wir angesehe hiette unsern
sun. Do sprach zu yr Thobias
Du scholt nicht waynenn
unser Sun chumbt gesunt
ter do hynn Und chert au
ch'gesunntter herwider zw
uns und deine augenn
(End of f- 136™"°.)

Maihingen MS III D. i,fol. 1.

. . und do sy hin geczogen waren

do begonde sein muter weynen

und sprechen den stap unsers

alters hastu

genfimen

und hast yn gesant

von uns das nicht were

das gelt nach dem

du yn gesant hast wen genuget

hett uns unser armut und

als den reichtflme hetten wir ge-

achtet das das wir hetten gesehen un-

siine Und thobias sprach zu ir [sern

nicht wein

gesunt kumpt unss sune

herwider

zu uns

und deyn augen

fo. i37wto ) co i_ j] t> etc

ougen werden yn sehen. we
ne ich geloube das der gute
engel gotes wander mit im
und schicke wol alle dink di
pei im werden gehandelt al
so das . . . etc.

werden in sehen und
ich glaub das der gut
engel gotes mit ym wander
und schicke wol alle dingk dy
by ym werden gehandelt al-
so das . . . etc.

Of this new translation III Esdras 8. 88-Tobias 5. 26 there are
no further traces. To assume with Jelinek, pp. 4, 5, that this
portion had been lost from the MS and replaced by the Bavarian
scribe (2) is not possible, for the new scribe would not at all have
been able in that case to gauge his work so as to fill exactly eight
pages. We must assume that this portion was written before
that which follows.

The Middle German scribe (ij, who sets in again here, on
f. I37 r -, continues to the end of vol. 3, f. 144. This is another
signature of 8 pp., and contains the rest of Tobias and seven
verses of Judith. Thus far the order of the books has been that
of the Vulgate; but the fourth volume, instead of continuing
Judith, begins with Isaiah. This is the work of the Bavarian

68 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

scribe again, who continues to f. io v -, only one-fourth of the verso
being filled. In this section there are no illustrations. The first
col. of f. io v - ends, about half-way down the page : wirt sy fressen
und enczunt wirt in der dikche des waldes (Isaiah 9. 18). The
italicized words are by a later hand. The second column is
blank, with the exception of the line at the bottom : wirt id' dikche.
These are the work of the Bavarian scribe (2), and continue the
sentence from enczunt. A later reviser inserted the same words
above, immediately after enczunt. This later reviser was also a
Bavarian, to judge from the form dikche.

On f. 1 i r - another scribe commences : wirt si in der dicke des
waldes und vorwandelt wirt si mit einander. This scribe (3) is
also Middle German, but different from (1), who consistently wrote
ous, ouf, and sometimes us, uf, but never au, aw ; this scribe (3)
generally writes us, uf, sometimes au, but never ou, the most
common form of (1). Other differences between these two
scribes will be noted later. Scribe 3 has a strong admixture of
Bavarian forms, such as guldeiner, bawern, schawen, kaus, mawer ;
old -ft generally appears as au, aw, except in the words us, uf.
This scribe continues through the "gepete ieremie," to f. 146'-,
of which only one-third of a column is filled. The verso is blank.
F. i47 r - is also blank. With f. I47 v -, at the top, another scribe (4),
Bavarian, commences: Hie hebt sich an das buch das do heisset
Judith mit semelichen wort en. The page ends, Judith 1.7: und
sein hercze wart. | This scribe has ai, ue, au, even in aus, au/,
which latter writing distinguishes him from both the Middle Ger-
man scribes, while the absence of further Bavarian characteristics
distinguishes him from the Bavarian scribe 2.

On f. I48 r - the Middle German scribe 1 sets in again, Judith
1. 7 : wart erhaben. Here we have as a rule ous, tousent, but also
aus, tausent. It is the same scribe 1, but the instances of au
are more frequent.

The mixed state of affairs in the first part of vol. 4 is to be
explained as follows : Vol. 3, it will be remembered, ended with
Judith 1. 7, scribe 1, and f. 148 of vol. 4 forms the proper con-
tinuation of this, by the same scribe. By mistake the portion
written by scribe 3, vol. 4, ff. 11-146, was inserted. Then the
Bavarian scribe 2 added ff. 1-10 of vol. 4, in order to have Isaiah
complete. Later, the Bavarian scribe 4 inserted f. 147, in order
to have Judith complete. He copied this from vol. 3, f. 144,
which had been written by the Middle German scribe 1, and this

THE WENZELBIBEL. 6g

probably accounts for the absence of further Bavarian character-
istics, as the passage was not extended enough to enable him to
get into the swing of his own dialect. That f. 147, and also ff. i-io,
of vol. 4 were inserted later, is shown by the fact that three-fourths
off. io v -, as well as the whole of I47 r -, are blank.

The Middle German scribe 1 continues from f. 148 to the end
of vol. 4, f. 211. Volume 5, beginning with the Psalter, to f. 186
incl. is also the work of this scribe, though his language contains
more Bavarian elements. At the beginning of vol. 5, before the
Psalter, is a table of contents, beginning : " In dem gegen^urtigen
puech sind vermerkt die hernachgeben puecher . . ."; and the
date, 1447. Dr. Goldlin von Tiefenau considers it possible that
the scribe of this table of contents is the same as the one on f. 147,
vol. 4, while Jelinek considers it almost certain that they are
identical.

The Middle German scribe 1 continues to Ecclesiasticus
34. 24: angesichte des vaters. | On f. i87 r -, vol. 5, the Bavarian
scribe 2 sets in : | das prat der durstigen ist ein leben des armen
... In this portion characteristic Bavarian forms occur, such
as dew (= die), gesuechet, chain, gedenkch, andrew, erwekch,
sckikch, ge/olkleick, froleick, gebund, werich, verpirig, wider-
beriig (=w), weyroch.

This scribe continues to the bottom off. i92 v -: si werdent wirt-
schefften in seine gepoten und | On f. iQ3 r - the Middle German
scribe 1 sets in again, Ecclesiasticus 39. 37 : | werden sie wirt-
scheften und ouf der erden in der notdurft werden sie bereitet . . .
This scribe continues through vol. 5, into vol. 6. Through some
mistake the rubric at the end of Ecclesiasticus reads genani ist
sprichworter. Vol. 6 begins with Isaiah, this time in the correct
order of the Vulgate. Here the diphthong of H is generally
written au, except in the words ous, ouf. Scribe 1 continues to
the end off. i23 v< : von den steten iuda | (= Jerem. 34. 7). On
the next leaf the Bavarian scribe 2 sets in again : | juda gemawrte
stete das wort das do wart . . . This scribe continues to the
bottom of f. i30 v -, = Jerem. 40. 1 : gefuert wurde gegen Babilon
und das ] . On the next leaf the Middle German scribe 1 sets
in again: | babilon und das haus . . . He continues to the
bottom of i38 v -, = Jerem. 46. 2 : den do |. On the next leaf the
Bavarian scribe 2 sets in : | den do slueg nabuchodonasor kunig
von babilo in dem virden iare ... In this section are a number
of instances of zwrliesen, and other words with vor-, whereas in

•JO AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

other places this scribe generally uses the form ver-. The vor-
must be from the Middle German original. The scribe continues
to f. 152% = Jerem. 52. 34: uncz bis an de tage seines todes alle
die tage seines lebens. This is the end of the prophecy of Jere-
miah, but the Lamentations are omitted. On the next page the
Middle German scribe 1 sets in again, with the book of Baruch :
hie hebet sich an di vorrede in das buch baruch. The following
forms occur: f. \$-g- , pristem, ous; f. 153% aus (2), tak; f. I54 r -,
gotis,wek, aus, iczleicher; f. i6i v -, auf, gotis, dorin, vor-, wek;
f. 2o6 v -, aus ; f. 220 v -, ouf, but auf more frequent. In this portion
au is much more frequent than in the other sections assigned to
this scribe, but it is reasonably certain that we have to do with
the same scribe. This scribe continues to the end of f. 224, =
Ezek. 45. 9: gerichte gar un |. On f. 225 r - the Bavarian scribe 2
sets in again : | und tut gerechtikait. The writing is quite different
from the preceding. Characteristic forms occur, such as (f. 225 r )
gerechtikait, abschaidt, trukchner, subenten (3), moneids, gays-
pokch ; f. 227 r -, dresigk, gankch. This scribe continues to the
end of the work, f. 231'-, middle of col. 1, the end of the book of
Ezekiel.

Jelinek, p. 4, does not notice this last change of scribes, f. 224-
225, and in fact assigns this whole section, ff. 153-231, to the
Middle German scribe 3, whereas it is very clear that this scribe
had nothing to do with either of these sections. In the first place,
the writing on f. 225 shows that a change of scribes occurred
there, which Jelinek overlooked. In the next place, the section
153-224 shows ous, aus exclusively, whereas in the portion really
written by scribe 3, vol. 4, ff. 11-146, us, uf predominate, aus, auf
occurring now and then, but never ous, ouf, which are the charac-
teristic forms of scribe 1 ; Jelinek has recognized these differ-
ences, pp. 38-39, but has failed to take them into account here.
Furthermore, as regards the last section, vol. 6, ff. 225-231,
Jelinek's own testimony is sufficient to show that this belongs to
the Bavarian scribe. On f. 225 alone three instances of subenten,
for sibenten 'seventh,' occur, and Jelinek, p. 25, states : " suben nur
beiy" (= Bavarian scribe 2). In conclusion I may state that Dr.
Goldlin von Tiefenau has compared the above delimitation of
the various scribes with the MS, and his comparison sustains my
conclusions.

The following list will give a comprehensive view of the extent
of the work of the various scribes :

THE WENZELBIBEL.

Middle German scribe 1.
Vols. 1, 2=240+182=422 ff.

vol. 3,

ff. 1- 6

= 6

8-128

= 121

137-144

= 8

vol. 4,

148-21 1

= 64

vol. 5,

1-186

= 186

(( ■

193-206

= 14

vol. 6,

1-123

= 123

131-138

= 8

153-224

= 72

Total,

1024 ff.

Bavarian scribe 2.

Vol. 3>

f. 7 = 1 f.

ff. 129-136= 8 ff.

vol. 4,

1- 10=10

vol. 5,

187-192= 6

vol. 6,

124-130= 7

139-152=14

225-231= 7

Total,

53 ff-

Middle German scribe 3.
Vol.4,ff. 11-146 =136 ff.

Bavarian scribe 4.
Vol. 4, f. 147 = 1 f.

As has already been mentioned incidentally, whenever there is
a change of scribes, the old scribe ends on the verso of a leaf,
while the new one invariably commences with a new leaf. Vol. 3,
f. 7, not being filled, also vol. 4, ff. 1-10, were most probably
inserted later by scribe 2, on discovering the gaps left by 1
and 3. Vol. 4, f. 147, was inserted much later by scribe 4.
The rest of the work of scribe 2 must be considered as having
been done at the same time as that of 1 and 3. The fact that in
all these other cases — vol. 3, 129-136; vol. 5, 187-192; vol.6, 124-
130, 139-152, 225-231 — the pages are full at every change of
scribes, precludes the possibility of the assumption of Jelinek, pp.
4, 5, that these portions had dropped out of the original MS, and
were replaced later by scribe 2. In this case we must assume
that the original remained with the present copy, and also that
the original had pages of exactly the same size as the present
Wb.; otherwise the last page of the inserted parts would not
have been full, as is shown by vol. 3, f. 7 ; vol. 4, f. 10, f. 147.
Furthermore, the section vol. 3, 129-136, which contains the
new translation, could not have been in the original, as in that
case its limits would not have corresponded exactly with the
limits of the scribe who wrote it. As the last page of this is full
also, we must assume that it was written just after the preceding
portion and just before the following.

72 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

A causal connection probably exists between the various
changes of scribes and the repetitions occurring there, which are
to be explained as follows: When scribe i stopped at vol. 3, 128,
he underscored in the original the last two words that he had
copied, as a sign for the following scribe. The latter then started
with the underscored words, but thought he would continue with
a translation of his own. At the end of his eight leaves he marked
the place in the original which he had reached, and the next scribe
copied the underscored word again. This process was repeated
at each change. F. 152, vol. 6, ends with a book, Jeremiah, and
consequently there was no repetition.

In the case of the portions inserted later, the reviser who com-
pared the copy with the original in the same way underscored the
last words of the part to be inserted.

The duplicate version of Isaiah and Jeremiah, in vol. 4, is
entirely by scribe 3 (except the first ten ff., which were later
added by 2), and this is the whole extent of the work of that scribe.
It may be that this was intended for another copy, which has not
come down to us, and was put into the Wb. by mistake, in place
of the books following Ezekiel ; or it may be that the scribe
mistook a mark in the original and began at the wrong place.

Walther treats this question of the MS and the arrangement of
the text, col. 291-294, but his treatment is very inaccurate. He
states that there may have been different scribes at work, but
where, he does not know — col. 294 : " Es mag der mit dem Gebet
Manasse beginnende Band auf mehrere Schreiber verteilt worden
sein, von denen der zweite mit Judith begann, und der erste, ohne
der ihm gesteckten Grenze sich zu erinnern, einfach seine Perga-
mentbogen vollschrieb, welche etwas mehr Raum boten als man
vorher berechnet hatte." He refers then to the duplicate portion
of Judith 1. 1-7, but his supposition is entirely erroneous, as the
duplicate page is by scribe 4 and was inserted later. Furthermore,
the same scribe (1) wrote the first part of Judith in vol. 3, and the
continuation in vol. 4. There are indeed several scribes in the
volume to which Walther refers, but not where he supposes them
to be.

Concerning the two versions of Isaiah and Jeremiah he says,
col. 292 : " Ohne Zweifel aber ist jener erste Teil des 4. Bandes
gar nicht ein Bestandteil der eigentlichen Wenzelbibel, sondern
dieser nur aus Versehen einverleibt. Denn er ist mit anderer
Tinte und von anderer Hand geschrieben als das Vorhergehende

THE WENZELBIBEL. 73

und Nachfolgende ; und die Schreibung der Worte ist meistens
eine von derjenigen in den tibrigen Teilen abweichende, obwohl
die Uebersetzung im Grund genau dieselbe ist. So lesen wir in
der wirklichen Wenzelbibel: zu, ouf, milch, vliessen, wenne,
menige ; hier dagegen ofter : czu, uff, milich, vlisen, wann, menke.
Auch begegnen wir hier manchen Versehen, welche der 6. Band
nicht kennt, und die man fur Horfehler halten mochte. So lautet
Is. 1. 3 im 4. Bande : Der auch sy hat erchant die chripp, im 6.
Bande aber richtig und in anderem Dialect: Der ochse hat
erkannt die crippe." He is here unable to discriminate between
two very different dialects in vol. 4, Isaiah, though he quotes from
both — first uff, vlisen, then erchant, chripp ; — he merely assigns
the whole to a new scribe, writing in a new dialect.

Next he quotes two other slight inaccuracies in Isaiah, vol.4, to
show the difference between this text and that of vol. 6: ver-
stumten in vol. 4 = vertumten in vol. 6, and regel, vol. 4 = rogel,
vol. 6. These inaccuracies of vol. 4, all of which have been quoted
above, are insignificant scribal errors and do not prove anything.
He then shows by a single instance, Is. 60. 5, where vol. 4 has
correctly die menke des meres, while vol. 6 has only die menige,
that vol. 4 can not have been copied from vol. 6. Nowhere,
however, does he eliminate or even mention the possibility that
both texts may have been copied from one and the same MS,
unless he takes the above-mentioned differences, which are the
only ones that he gives, as sufficient to prove this, which is
certainly not the case. He proceeds, nevertheless : " So sind
denn die beiden Biicher Isaias und Jeremias im 4. Bande ein
Teil einer zweiten Handschrift dieses Kreises und von der
Wenzelbibel auszuschliessen. Genau genommen also wiirden
wir sie als eine zwblfte Handschrift zu zahlen haben." In this
connection Walther also fails to note the fact that the duplicate
translation of Jeremiah contains the Lamentations, while the
other, in the sixth volume, does not. This fact alone would
prove that the version in vol. 4 was not copied from vol. 6. By
calling the version in vol. 4 the duplicate, and eliminating it, the
MS would have an additional lacuna.

The agreements of the two texts, which Walther does not con-
sider, are much greater than the differences, as may be seen by
reference to the following table, which is by no means exhaustive,
the instances being taken from extracts which were made for
other purposes.

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

►si

8
<3

-a

S
<a

-Si

i! C

*>. ?>

k .3.

H) ^)

«JJ u

^ ^s

C
3

§ S 3

^ fee
^3 8*

p— i

en
4>

i — i

C
V

•a

4-»

«2

•8

***

& & -
« - 1

i- S y

S
cu

CO «

"J .
1-. V

CU -J)

JS ^S

CO »

cu s-

*co

)-.

a
cu

5!
v.

a °
13

U
■4-J

-a
o
°C
cu

V a!

-a co

.5 ff-s
cu "o 9

CO
CO

.a 8
8 8

-a
<>>

•St

•o

3
N

■4-»

■4-»
C«

bxj

B
c«

■%*

'53

•*

O
O

'co

CU
0/)

u
cu

** -

& •-*

<v>

•« u

cu cu

J3 ;G

B ■£

S <u

^
a

•2 >§

fee

JJ CU

co A

.fe«

CO U3

•o .S
cu

4~» W

cu
■3

1
|

J3
CJ

H <U

.S'S

cu >

.a §
8 3

i-i

•*-»

■*-»

3
N

*>5

cti

U 1

8 S

4»

.B 1

*«4

3 C

,- <s

Q
S

CT 1

— - .3

g CO CO

.3 i-i T3
co cu 5

** CJ

4->

S 8

. 1

°0

CU 5

-a

s is
m

•3

co T3 o

cu «

-a

3 c« m

S
cu

4-1

•o

■*

1— 1

l-«

t-<

t^.

■*

•n

°c«

t— (

1— 1

t— H

*-~*

i— ,

1 — I

THE WENZELBIBEL. 75

These instances in which the two texts of the Wenzelbibel
agree, as against variant readings of the other MSS, are much
more important than the differences quoted by Walther. Espe-
cially noteworthy are the omissions Is. 7. 6, in seiner mitte, and
Jer. 35. 11, der Caldeer und von der angesicht des heres. The
insertion, in all the other MSS, of the clause wer widersaget mir,
is also significant, while the two texts of the Wb. follow the Vul-
gate. The change of pfeyll to gesckos, Jer. 51. 11, and the 6rder
hause gotes as against gots hauss also show the close relationship
of the two texts under discussion. There is consequently no
valid objection to the supposition that both were copied from one
and the same MS.

The translation itself is doubtless of Middle German origin :
Jelinek places it in Bohemia, in the vicinity of Prague, but he
does not take into account the other MSS. The present MS is
probably the oldest of the group, with the possible exception of
the fragment cgm. 341. The earliest dated MS is Maihingen III
D. 1, fol. 1 (1437). This also has strongly marked Middle Ger-
man characteristics, as also the Weimar MS fol. 3-8, dated 1458,
and the Nurnberg MS cent III, N 41-43, dated 1437-43. The
MS at Nikolsburg I was unable to examine, as the official in
charge was absent at the time of my visit.

The MSS of Walther's second subdivision, which have partly
this text, partly a different one, are all late, and the Middle Ger-
man characteristics have been obliterated, as they were written by
Bavarian scribes: Cgm. 219-221, written 1463, by Oswald Nott,
at Tegernsee ; cgm. 502-503, written 1463, by Georg Rorer, at
Regensburg ; Maihingen 1, 3, D., fol. Ill, IV, written 1468, by
Georg Rorer. Gotha MS 10 is closely related, but date and
scribe are unknown. The Middle German origin of the transla-
tion is therefore established beyond peradventure.

Franklin and Marshall College. W. KURRELMEYER.